There are many types of photography that would not suit the process of magnifying the image before capture, as I have highlighted in other posts. Therefore, in these situations, for me, OVF is far superior, despite some of the other obvious benefits of EVF.

True but that is usually for action photography where we rely on AF because of it's greater speed. In those situations we have to rely on the accuracy of the camera AF. Nothing can beat a magnified EVF view for macro.

As long as it's still life macro. Magnified view is no good for an insect in flight. Action photography could include wildlife, wildlife macro, fashion (catwalk), weddings, sports (including motorsports), air shows, candid people shots, photojournalism and a whole lot more. For me, OVF is better for all of the above, but for others EVFs advantages outweigh OVF even in these situations.

OVF vs EVF will never be put to bed, so why don't we all just use what we like and get on with it?

True at least for now but never is a long long time. I can see a time when EVFs will be so good that the need for an OVF will disappear for everybody. It just hasn't happened yet. Much of the resistance to EVFs is for purely aesthetic reasons.

Like I've said before, give me a 10Mp EVF and I'll probably be happy, but I could now add to that a desire for higher refresh rate (fps) and wider dynamic range. With the advances in processing power etc., who's to say we won't have that in say 5 years or so?

As to the resistance being for aesthetic reasons, well certainly not in my case, or in the case of most of the rational responses on here from people who favour OVF, but in fairness, there may be a large element that fit your description.

Ultimately, it's the pictures that are important and some very fine photography has been produced on some very basic equipment in the past. The technology is not the most important thing.